Hi,

Alan Stern <[email protected]> writes:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2018, Roger Quadros wrote:
>
>> >> Can we avoid the spin_lock() and the work-queue and call usb_ep_dequeue() 
>> >> directly from here?
>> >>> What is the purpose of the spin_lock()?
>> > 
>> > I agree that the lock doesn't seem to be necessary. But I believe the whole
>> > thing is already running in non-sleeping context, even before the spinlock
>> > is taken. So this wouldn't help much.
>> > 
>> > Even the io_cancel() syscall takes a spinlock before invoking the cancel
>> > function. So this issue is not exclusive to program termination.
>> > 
>> > Are there any documented guidelines on which context usb_ep_dequeue() 
>> > should
>> > be able to be called in? The sleep in the dwc3 driver seems to be a recent
>> > addition.
>> 
>> drivers/usb/udc/gadget/core.c has the only documentation, but context is not 
>> mentioned there.
>> Felipe, what do you suggest?
>
> As far as I remember, usb_ep_dequeue() is supposed to be more or less 
> analogous to usb_ep_queue(); drivers should be allowed to call either 
> routine in an atomic context.

Hmm, that's what I remember, but we don't have that documented and dwc3
has a sleep in its dequeue, which I need to remove for other reasons
anyway.

Can we get a patch updating documentation to make it clear that both
queue and dequeue should be callable from any context?

-- 
balbi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to